New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-10-16
THE PROBLEM ~ UTAH.

Tho Utah Commission is divided in its views
about tho Mormons For the past TOUT years
the Edmunds law has been momenVous lac.
in Utah 1t has been applied by the Icrrlto'iai
Judges with great vigor. The Cnl'cd o'ateS
6up~cme Court has declined to revue" inc
cases presented to it on appeal from The triai
courts because it lacks jurisdiction. ITO la"
having made no provision for wrts of error.
rho Utah Judges have thus been left wholly to
their own discretion in construmg the STATUTE
and hey have not been technical 1hcJ nave
considered evely case where man ackho"l-
cdccd TWO or moro women to be bis wives as
within tho meaning OF the act, wiener inc
man lived with moro than one woman or hoc'
The NIormons say that this is not good law
but certainly its effect has been cmlncntiy
good.
The Normons themselves have confessed TINS
by Their plans to escape som" OF The hadShips
it involves Congress passed law against
nolvramy in 1862. but it was not enforced
and it had no effect in preventing piurh
,narrioccs. But tho zeal and rccntlcSSncss
with which tho Edmunds act has been app'icd
have struck blow at the system OF polygamy
which the MorInons. II their uttcranccs be ac-
They strongly dcnouncc the Territorial judges
and assert that their construction oi the law
makes it attack. not only tho practice Of plural
MARRIAGE. but their religious brllcf
in lis Divine specification. They
explain that 9olygamy is not made mandatory
h their revelations hut sim,ly pcrmlsSIvc.
They acknowledge the right Of hcPovcrnmcn'
70 nrohibit any practice deemed injurious I"
socictv. and the futllty Of pleading religious
belief rs an excuse for breaking the laws.
They say that they are ready % rcnounco
rolvcamv forever. and deny that they arc now
LIVING in plural wcdlock. This, they claim
il obedience To the ilv. and 'cy protest
AGAINST the conviction Of mon whose only
crime. as they live apart from their Illegal
wives. consists in continuing to provl1c Tor
those 10 whom they have phghtcd matrimonial
vows and in Acknowledging them a wives.
This acl,nowlcd rmcnt they consider a religious
du,v. ~ their faith teaches them that tho
marriage rotation continues through all ctcr-
ntv. II nav wcl hc doubted II 50 much a.
this. which is really 4 great deal. would have
been accomplished wv any lcss vigorous attack
upon poygamy than the Territorial courts
have made.
Bllt Il new tl''I'Nl HIS ld'''' 'I'''i'' INV
the problem. The Normons held a convention
last June and adopted State Constitution
upon which they propose to ask the admission
II Utah. 1t declares bigImy and polygamy
10 be misdcmcanors and provides that 10
further legislation shall be required for their
punishment. II surrcndcrs the power 10 alter
amend or repeal thi' clause except with red
cral consent. a barrain with The General Gov
eminent the conSttutlonality Of which ~ IN
grave doubt though if bears upon the sincerity
Of their pledges Three Of the Utah CommlS-
sioncrs deny that this is any real concession
10 The Federal supremacy or any Just guarantee
against poyeamy The other two Commits
sioncrs accept it in good faith This division
Of opinion is probably significant q the diverse
views which members Of Congress viii hold
when the problem comes before them for soln-
ton. And there can be no harm IN frank
aud fearless debate If the MormonS have
framed an honest Constitution they are entitled
10 a chance 10 provo the fact. But they must
arrange TO make the proof very dear.